Mail Archives: djgpp/2008/07/07/15:20:18
> What is the status of 2.04?
If we can get the people who know about 2.04-related unfixed bugs to
summarize, maybe we can just release it as-is and put off those fixes
for a quick 2.05.
> Should be easier to start with a "release" and move to "current" ?
If you're interested in helping, please start with cvs.
> What is the status of getting diffs propagated upstream?
For djgpp, post them to djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
> But gcc the patches don't appear present in 4.3.1.
> I checked just one or two.
> I understand there is no obligation to submit or accept diffs.
> But it would be nice.
gcc-patches AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org
but you need to get the OK of the original patch author, and find out
why they haven't been contributed yet - there may be djgpp-specific
reasons to keep it out of the general sources.
> libstdc++-v3 fails due to __iov being incomplete.
> It has something to do with
> GLIBCXX_CHECK_WRITEV
> vs.
>
>
> *djgpp)
> ...
> D:\djgpp\gnu\gcc-4.23\libstdc++-v3\crossconfig.m4(61): AC_DEFINE(HAVE_WRITEV)
>
>
> crossconfig.m4 is hardcoded for 2.04?
> I see current cvs has writev, but that 2.03 does not.
That might mean it's hardcoded for the newer features. Automated
testing for djgpp features is tricky at best.
> I suspect if I setup an LFN-aware native DJGPP, this would configure
> correctly, but that cross builds avoid the probe, but that probing
> would work, since by now there is a cross-ld and I do get a gcc.exe.
You could try a native djgpp build, assuming you have LFN.
- Raw text -